Abstract
This paper rehearses some arguments in favour of a normative, commitment based semantics for dialogue acts, as opposed to more familiar mentalistic accounts based on notions of belief and intention. The main focus of the paper is on identifying appropriate notions of propositional commitment and entitlement that can be applied to argumentation and dialogue modelling. A case is made for adopting elements of Brandom’s framework of normative pragmatics, modelling dialogue states as deontic scoreboards which keep track of commitments and entitlements that speakers acknowledge and hearers attribute to other interlocutors. The paper concludes by outlining protocols and update rules for selected dialogue acts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
